ITER PAUL RUBENS 


a. ee 
J ae 
. 
\ 
y 2 
i 
She i 
wd . 
‘ 
fies 
‘~ 
i ny 
4 it 
4 7 
i ‘ 
a ‘ j 
a ‘ 
‘i 7 
r i 
| 
j . 
ie 
by 
! 
nol 
hie 
ye \y rs 
% y 
: 3 jae 0 ciae 
y tt + & 5 
4 ’ 4 St. e 


= 


= 
. 
af 


: 


The paintings illustrated and described herein are part of 
the collection of the Gallery of ite “fackson Higgs and are 


for sale, delivery to be made at the close of the Exhibition. 


is ' 
b 
% 
_ 
f 
; 
‘ 
. < 
E 
« 5 
‘ 
5 
é 
& 
a 
\ 
ee x 
_ 
ers 
VJ > 
) 
‘ 
ry 
ee 
{ 
<m) 
- = 
iG ‘ 


Exhibition 


Commemorating the 35 oth Anniversary 
of | 


meeek PAUL RUBENS. 


& 


Held cAt 


The Gallery of 
P. FACKSON HIGGS 


Eleven East Fifty-fourth Street 
New York 


127 


“THE ADORATION OF THE MAGI” 


by 
Peter Paul Rubens 


Acquired from our Gallery by the 
Metropolitan Museum, New York 


Foreword 


POOH SOS S6S00O°9O 9 


889HIS year sees the 350th anniversary of the birth of 


has been a great power in the world of art and 
his best work is as alive today as it was during 
his earthly sojourn. | 

It is by a very happy coincidence that our Gallery has just now 
seven outstanding examples of the work of Rubens in its possession, 
three of which, in point of interest, importance and quality, are really 
supreme works and will scarcely find their match in this country, 
even in the foremost collections. We are, therefore, in the position 
to arrange for our patrons a MemoriAL EXHIBITION OF THE 
Works oF Rusens which, we are confident, will be an event in 
this New York art season not soon to be forgotten. 

In Europe the preeminence of Rubens is recognized and every 
great collection includes one or more examples of his work. How- 
ever, there are those in America who still speak of Rubens with a 
supetcilious shrug of the shoulder, as “‘the painter of too solid flesh 
and heavy women.” It is true, during a certain time of his career, he 
certainly had a predilection for the ample type of woman, but it 
must not be forgotten that that was the style of his period, and even 
the greatest pay tribute to their time. But his range was far wider 
than those rather fleshy scenes which exclusively come into certain 
people’s minds when they think of Rubens. Besides, his quality as 
a great painter, his wonderful color, his masterly modeling, his 
strength in composition, have nothing to do with the types selected 
in certain of his paintings. Moreover, just these paintings belong 
mostly to that class of work the execution of which was left, to a 
great degree, to his pupils. 

What he himself, unaided by his many pupils, could accomplish 
in the fulness of his strength our seven pictures, and especially the 
three outstanding ones, will prove to everybody who has eyes to 
see. There are two, the state portrait of the Infanta Maria Anna 


als 7) x 
0 Deocdsosdooen 9 | : 
Wea lace BS the great Flemish artist Peter Paul Rubens, who 
$0 NS 
a p23 was born on June 28th, 1577. Ever since he 
: eh emerged fully fledged from his apprenticeship he 
serveveoecesG 0 
9 
9 
9 


22 CFC S°1SOSOS 


CPQPOPOIPOIPO PPO OO 


with its marvelously painted court dress in silvery grey against a 
cool blue background, and the strong portrait of Michel Ophoven, 
Rubens’ father-confessor, in the black and white habit of a Do- 
minican monk, which repudiate what has so often been said about 
Rubens’ color being always “hot.” When he found that it suited 
his purpose he could choose a “‘cool’”’ color scheme with the same 
success as any of the other masters and not lose one iota of his 
vitality and vigor, which sprang from the very center of his being. 

Healthy in body and mind, with a fine inner balance all his 
own, which also made him a good diplomat, he faced the world, as 
it were, as a good son of the mother of all of us, Nature, and in 
his paintings sang songs of praise to her. Nothing human was 
unknown to him and nothing human was considered unworthy of 
his art by him. Thus he became the greatest naturalist that ever 
lived. 

For that reason, too, his best portraits are absolutely natural and 
do not try to hide anything; for instance the one in this exhibition 
which shows King Philip IV of Spain in all his weakness but on the 
other hand gives his rather melancholy and friendly eyes their full 
due. Nature in all her manifestations was sacred to him. As in the 
oath in court he seems to have promised her to tell the truth, the 
whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But, on the other hand, he 
clothes everything in his beautiful colors, elevates everything to 
a higher plane by his style, gives permanence to fleeting moments 
through his composition and, in that way, enriches and enobles life 
wherever he sees and touches it. | 

He was in love with life, and if one looks at his self-portrait, 
which, most appropriately, is included in this Memorial Exhibition 
as one of the rarest items (for so far there is no other one known 
outside of a few public Galleries) , this kindliness, this openminded- 
ness becomes at once apparent. 

It is not often that a happy chance reunites again, perhaps after 
centuries of separation, pictures which, by right, as it were, belong 
to each other. Here in our Exhibition there hang now next to each 
other, Rubens’ own self-portrait, painted probably in 1615, and that 
of his first wife, Isabella Brant, and her first born son Albert, prob- 
ably also painted in the same year; and as a reflection of the happy 


family group there is the delightful and spirited “Holy Family,” 
in which the Virgin Mary bears the same features as the mother in 
“The Artist’s Wife and Son” and is undoubtedly Isabella herself. 
“The Artist’s Wife and Son,” considered by Dr. Friedlaender 
one of the finest works of the master, is a painting which shows 
Rubens at the height of his art. Its grouping seems as natural as it 
is inevitable; its coloring is like a jubilant spring song when flowers 
burst into bloom; its modeling and flesh tints are unsurpassed, and 
the sentiment pervading it exhalts, as it were, the love of a proud 
husband and father. No warmer, no more intimate scene could be 
imagined. And the same artist paints, about ten years later, the 
stately and beautifully balanced portrait of the Archbishop of 
Ghent, which Dr. von Bode, the eminent connoisseur, considers one 
of the greatest achievements in portraiture. Here Rubens com- 
bines, in a really masterly way, the grand style of portraiture with 
an intimate and sympathetic study of a great man, a power in the 
land, who, however, used his power only for the good of humanity, 
who helped the poor and was a generous patron of the artists, espe- 
cially Rubens himself. As ‘The Artist’s Wife and Son” grew out 
of the master’s love, so this portrait sprang from a warm feeling 
of gratitude. And as the best and most characteristic works of a 
great master are those which, in some way, have their origin in 
his innermost self, these two pictures can, without any exaggeration, 
be pronounced as belonging to the very finest flower of our artist’s 
entire life work. They will thus, on the eve of the 350th anniversary 
of the master’s birth, testify to his enduring greatness. Few there 
were in all the history of art who could rival Rubens, none, if every- 
thing be taken into consideration, who could ever surpass him. 


PETER PAUL RUBENS 


was born at Siegen in Westphalia in 1577. His father, Jan Rubens, 
a lawyer; was an alderman of Antwerp who, in the time of religious 
intolerance, fled to Cologne in order to escape persecution at the 
hands of the Duke of Alba. After his death in 1587 the family 
returned to Antwerp and Peter Paul Rubens, at the age of thirteen, 
entered upon the study of art under Tobias Verhaecht, a land- 
scape painter of considerable reputation. Later on he became a 


pupil of Adam van Noort and one of his fellow students was Jacob 
_ Jordaens. At the age of nineteen he removed to the studio of Otto 
van Veen, court painter to the Archduke Albert and the Infanta 
Isabella. Archduke Albert enabled Rubens to go to Italy in 1600, 
where Vincenzo Gonzaga, the reigning Duke of Mantua, became his 
patron. Rubens worked in Venice, Florence, Rome and Mantua 
until 1603, when his patron sent him to Spain on a mission which 
was partly artistic, partly diplomatic. A year later he returned to 
Mantua and worked there and in Rome until 1608. His mother’s 
illness recalled him to Antwerp and there, in 1609, he married Isa- 
bella Brant. 

He was nominated court painter to the Archduke and a few 
years later began to build his famous house, which was not finished 
until 1618 and in which he installed his magnificent collection of art 
treasures. It was during this period that some of his finest pictures 
were painted. He valued his work at roo guilders, or about £10, 
a day. Among his pupils and ‘assistants were Anthony Van Dyck, 
Jacob Jordaens and Frans Snyders. 

In 1622 Rubens was called to Paris at the request of the Queen, 
Marie de Medici, who entrusted to him the decoration of the great 
gallery in the Palace of the Luxembourg, which work was finished 
in 1625. 

After a happy married life of sixteen years, his wife died in 
1626. However, Rubens was not permitted to nurse his grief in 
idleness, even if he had desired to do so. The Infanta Isabella, 
who on the death of her husband had become Governor of the 
Spanish Netherlands, had long appreciated the honesty and discre- 
tion of her Court painter, and had realized the advantage of em- 
ploying the services of so apparently innocent an agent. 

She kept him constantly engaged, either openly or secretly, in 
the delicate intrigues going on between Spain, France, and Eng- 
land, and finally, in 1628, sent him to Madrid in response to a some- 
what grudging invitation extended to him by Philip IV. at her 
urgent suggestion. The King’s Spanish pride could ill brook so 
ignoble an intermediary, but Rubens had not been long at the Court 
before his infinite tact and exquisite charm of manner had entirely 
won the reluctant autocrat. He was especially recommended to the 


attention of Velasquez, the Court painter, given a painting-room in 
the Palace, and frequently visited by the King, who also sat to him 
for his portrait. Nevertheless, the negotiations, in which he was 
chiefly concerned, progressed slowly, and though he occupied him- 
self by making full-sized copies of the Titians in the royal galleries, 
besides painting portraits and a few original works, he began to 
weary for his home. 

Having been nominated Secretary to the Privy Council of the 
Netherlands, he was dispatched as an envoy to London and was 
received with great honour and cordiality, had frequent interviews 
with the King, and finally brought to a successful issue the intricate 
and delicate commissions with which he had been charged. Am- 
bassadors were exchanged between England and Spain, and Rubens, 
who had three days previously received knighthood at Whitehall, 
left London on March 6, 1630, and returned to the Netherlands. 
Among the works that he painted during his nine months’ sojourn 
in England were the ceiling at Whitehall and “Peace and War,” 
now in the National Gallery. On December 6, 1630, Rubens, 
being fifty-three years old, married his second wife, Helena Four- 
ment, the daughter of his deceased wife’s sister. She was a girl of 
sixteen, and her pleasing appearance is familiar to the world in a 
number of her husband’s pictures. 

In 1635 his health began to fail and he suffered much from gout. 
In the same year, in order to escape from the constant interruptions 
of a city life, he purchased the Chateau de Steen, between Vilvorde 
and Mechlin, where he subsequently passed the summers, employing 
himself in painting landscapes. 

In 1636 he was made Court painter to Ferdinand, and designed 
a number of decorations for the Torre della Parada, a hunting- 
box which the Spanish King had built for himself near Madrid. 
His health continued, however, to get worse and worse. 

He died on May 30, 1640, and was temporarily interred in the 
vault of the Fourment family, but two years later his body was 
removed to a special chapel built out from the church of St. Jacques 
at Antwerp for its reception. A catalogue was made of the works 
of art in his possession, which sold for the then enormous sum of 
£25,000. 


SELF-PORTRAIT OF PETER PAUL RUBENS 


“PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST” 
by 
Peter PAUL RUBENS 


(1577-1640) 


Mahogany panel, 1614, x 13% ins. 
Painted in Antwerp, about 1615 


From the collection of S. Robinson, Esq., St. James, London 


CERTIFICATED BY Dr. W. R. VALENTINER: 


“The picture reproduced in this photograph is in my opinion a 
characteristic and authentic work by Rubens. It represents the artist 
himself and was executed about 1615. The expression is very pleas- 
ing and the execution is brilliant. The painting is in a good state of 
preservation.” (Signed) W. R. VaALeNTINER. 
Jan. 26, 1926. 


Only three other self-portraits by Rubens are known, and all of 
them are in European galleries. The one in the Uffizi Galleries, 
Florence, was painted at the same time or a little later than ours, 
between the years 1615 and 1618. The second, now at Windsor 
Castle, was painted about 1623 or 1624, and the third, in the 
Vienna State Museum, between 1638 and 1640. The last two men- 
tioned portraits show Rubens in his large slouch hat, therefore, the 
portrait in the Uffizi Galleries and ours are the only ones showing 
the full structure of his remarkable head. 

This colorful little panel represents the only self-portrait of 
Peter Paul Rubens outside a public Gallery and as, in characteristic 
contrast to Rembrandt, there are only few self-portraits of Rubens 
in existence, this newly discovered painting is of course of the great- 
est importance and interest. 

It shows Rubens at the age of about 38 years and is painted 
with that flowing brush and rythmical touch so characteristic of 
this great master. The flame of life itself seems to burn in the red 
of the background, shading into beautiful cooler tones on the left, 


and the touch of a great painter is seen in the bit of white against 
the red of the background and the brown of the coat. As the paint- 
ing is absolutely untouched by any restoration and is in every way 
in the finest condition, it gives full inside into Rubens’ method of 
work and his mastery of the brush. There is a feeling of great in- 
timacy in the portrait and the kindly eyes have something pensive in 
them. The wonderful dome of the forehead framed, as it were, most 
effectively by the hair on both temples is, in this painting, not 
half hidden underneath a large hat as in nearly all his other self- 
portraits and thus gives the spectator the full measure of this 
great man. 

A short comparison with the famous self-portrait of Rubens 
in the Uffizi will be of interest and prove the importance of our pic- 
ture. The Ufhzi Self-Portrait is nearest to ours in point of time 
and likeness. It was done only about three years later. The Uffizi 
portrait also shows Rubens with his forehead bared and with a very 
similar beard, only the moustache is turned down at the ends, whilst 
in our portrait it is turned upward, as if the artist, almost with a 
humorous and roguish touch, wanted to show that, in spite of his 
forty years, he was still a man of youth and “dash,” which is also 
betrayed by the careless, somewhat Bohemian style of his hair. The 
Uffizi portrait is a three-quarter profile one seen from the right, but 
ours shows Rubens almost en face, which adds considerably to its 
interest. Altogether, our portrait is the more intimate one, whereas 
the one in the Uffizi as well as all the others are more ceremonial 
in character. | 

The earliest known self-portrait of Rubens is that in the Old 
Pinakothek in Munich, in which he appears as a young man of 
about thirty-two years of age, with his first wife, Isabella Brant, 
at his side. They are both dressed in the sumptuous attire of the 
period, carefree, happy in each other, Isabella laying her hand on 
that of her bridegroom, as if to show that they belong to each other 
and “the world well lost”! As a matter of fact, a bower of brush- 


wood shuts them out from the outside, but sweet flowers bloom at 
their feet. : | | ven 


About fifteen years afterwards, the famous self-portrait with the 
large, half turned-down hat in Windsor Castle was painted. The 
face, still smooth and firm and healthy in color in our portrait, 
shows, in the Windsor Castle one, many lines; the flesh has sagged 
considerably, the eyes have an almost sad and questioning expres- 
sion, as if they wanted to find out what all this striving was for. 

Almost ten years more pass, and the elderly man takes to him- 
self a young wife, the beautiful Helene Fourment, and in his large 
painting in the Munich Old Pinakothek, we see him walking with 
her in his garden. All the riches he has gathered around him are 
here. There is the famous pavilion in the garden, which is still stand- 
ing today; everything is in bloom; Helene, in the most gorgeous 
dress, is the fairest of all the flowers. And he himself wears his large 
hat proudly, with a big feather decorating it. But, as if in selfirony, 
a peacock, the symbol of vanity, with his long tail, is shown in the 
foreground of the picture. 

It did not take many years more till his second youth at the side 
of the inspiring and lovely Helene Fourment was over. Not quite 
ten years later we see him in his last self-portrait, in the Vienna State 
Gallery, a “man of property,” a knight and nobleman, a man, 
proudly keeping up appearances, but a man with tired eyes and a 
tired mind, ready to exchange this life of the body and the passing 
hour for life eternal. | 


“Tre Artist’s WIFE AND SON” 
Isabella Brant and her son Albert 


“THE ARTIST’S WIFE AND SON” 
by 


PETER PAUL RUBENS 


(1577-1640) 


Oil on oak panel 

Height: 4014 inches 

Width: 29 inches 

Collection: Duke of Marlborough, Blenheim Castle 


Listed in: 
Smith, “Catalogue Raisonné,” vol. 2, Nr. 836 
Waagen, “Art Treasures in Great Britain,” vol. III, p. 126 


Etched by: 
Spruyt 
Michel, 1776 


CERTIFICATED BY Dr. Max J. FriEDLAENDER 


In 1609 Rubens, having returned to Antwerp from Italy the 
year before, married Isabella, the youthful daughter of the Ant- 
werp city clerk Jan Brant. Five years later she bore him a son who 
was christened Albert on June 5, 1614. 

Rubens had been a great friend of children before, drawing and 
painting them whenever he could. Their chubby little bodies, their 
sparkling eyes, their radiant health, the constantly changing ex- 
pression of their faces, their playfulness, in a word their astounding 
vitality touched a tender chord in his heart and awakened an echo 
in his soul. For was he not himself full of vital elan and playful- 
ness? But after his beloved wife, whom, ever since he had met her 
first, he put again and again into his pictures, had presented him 
with a son of his own (a daughter had been born to him in 1611), 


he never tired of painting him, often on the lap of his mother who 
tenderly cares for him, and lovingly watches his progress. 

By far the loveliest and most intimate of these paintings of his 
wife and son is undoubtedly the one now under discussion. Until 
lately, it was the cherished possession of the Duke of Marlborough 
in his Blenheim Palace in England, and there, years ago, aroused 
the admiration of the well-known connoisseur Dr. Waagen, the 
then director of the Berlin Museum, whose celebrated book on the 
Art Treasures of Great Britain is still a standard work. In this 
book our painting is mentioned as “executed in admirable impasto 


p) 


and with the greatest brilliancy of colouring.” And of present-day 
connoisseurs of world fame, Dr. Friedlaender is full of admiration 
for it. And no wonder, for it constitutes a high watermark in the 
master’s life work. | | 

Judging from the appearance of the little boy who, as repre- 
sented in our picture, is not much more than a year or a year and 
a half old, when he made his first still rather unsteady attempts at 
walking alone, the picture must have been painted in the late autumn 
of 1615. 

When, a few years later, Rubens got the order to paint a trip- 
tych in memory of Jan Michielsen, who died 1617, to be put in 
the Antwerp Cathedral, this picture of his wife and son was used, 
with a few not too happy variations, under the title of ‘Madonna 
and Child” for one of the wings. But the actual painting of the 
whole triptych is known to have been done almost entirely by 
Rubens’ great pupil Van Dyck (illustrated on page 161 in the 
Rubens volume of “Klassiker der Kunst’ and mentioned in E. 
Michel’s work on the painter, vol. I, p. 230, as Isabella Brant and 
her eldest Son, painted about 1618). 

In our painting, however, it is only the mother and child, the 
entirely human scene of a loving mother watching her little boy’s 
first tottering steps that has enchanted the painter-father, and his 
picture has consequently become his Song of Songs of Mother-love. 
How else could he have thought of that touching moment when the 


mother, as proud as the little chap himself of his first tentative 
step, does not want to support him openly, which would diminish 
his pride in his first great achievement, but lovingly holds her right 
arm so that in case of need it will give him comfort and prevent his 
falling? Her tender, protecting hand only just touches his little 
foot. And how else could he have put into the blue eyes of the 
little boy that first vague glimmer of an awakening soul? And 
those dark, deep, half-closed eyes of the mother which say so much 
more than if they were wide open! 

But apart from this delightful human element, eternal in its 
appeal and so beautifully, so spontaneously, so genuinely expressed 
in this picture, which is indeed a “luminous reflection of his do- 
mestic happiness” (E. Michel), it is hard to say which is greater: — 
the singing colors, the glorious red, the marvelous flesh tints, the 
whites, the darkish green of the sleeves, the subdued red, mysteri- 
ously shimmering through the black but transparent veil falling 
underneath the left arm; the arrangement, great in its simplicity and 
statuesque in its naturalness; or the masterly modeling of the two 
figures and the painting of the darkish brown but luminous back- 
ground which seems alive with the playful strokes of the brush. 
Truly, in every touch the master is apparent whom very few amongst 
the greatest could rival but none surpass. 


ANTHONY TrIEsT, ARCHBISHOP OF GHENT 


“PORTRAIT OF ANTHONY TRIEST, ARCHBISHOP 
OF GHENT” 


by 
Peter PAuL RUBENS 
(1577-1640) 


Oil on canvas 
Height: 48 inches 
Width: 43 inches 


The Archbishop is painted half-length, sitting in an armchair 
upholstered in red velvet and ornamented with brass nails. Over 
the long white surplice he wears a short episcopal cape, whose deep 
tich green, together with the lining of rose silk, sets the face off 
brilliantly. He has a biretta on his head, and the face is framed in 
a soft, white cambric collar. The hands are vigorous but calm, 
one resting on the arm of the chair, the other holding a letter with 
the inscription: a Monsieur Ant. Triest, éveque de Gant. Behind 
the figure hang curtains, through which is seen an architectural 
background in bright lively colours. 


CERTIFICATED BY Dr. WILHELM VON BoDE AS FOLLOWS: 


“The large portrait of Anton Triest, Bishop of Ghent (as inscribed 
on the letter in his hand), is a magnificent work by P. P. Rubens, 
painted about 1625, and executed by him alone. It is in an excel- 
lent condition, and composed and finished with particular care, as 
befitted the high position of the prelate. There is an engraving 
of the same Anton Triest in the Iconography of Wan Dyck. He was 
then some ten years older, as Van Dyck painted the picture from 
which the engraving was made in 1634/35, when he was for some 
time again in Antwerp. The picture is much superior to Wan Dyck’s, 
much more individual in conception, sympathetic in expression, and 
distinctly more powerful and careful in execution. The rich colours, 
the full, free painting, the strong, healthy hands, the special em- 
phasis on the well designed architectural background, all are char- 
acteristics of Rubens and different from Van Dyck. 

“Whenever Rubens was on particularly friendly terms with his sitter, 
as in the present case, he painted his portraits with especial care. 
This may also be seen, for instance, in the portrait of his friend 


Gevaerts in Antwerp.” 
(Signed) W. von Bone. 


From the Collection of: 
Sir George Douglas Clerk, Bart., of Penicuik 
Mr. Charles Lesser, London 
Marczell von Nemes, Budapest 
Dr. Karl Lanz, Mannheim 


Exhibited at: 
Edinburgh, Exhibition 
Budapest, Gallery of the Fine Arts 
Munich, Alte Pinakothek, 1911 
Duesseldorf, Exhibition 1912 


Literature: 


Emile Michel: “Rubens, his Life, his Works and his Time,” 
London, 1899, Vol. 2, pl. p. 72 


A. Dayot: “L’Art et les Artistes,” 12, p. 252 


H. von Tschudi: “Katalog der aus der Sammlung des Kgl. 
Rates Marczell von Nemes ausgestellten Gemaelde in 
der Kgl. Alten Pinakothek, Munich, 1911, pl. Nr. 23 
Les Arts, Paris, 1913 (June), Nr. 138, pl. p. 6 


The years between 1620 and 1630 were the period of Rubens’ 
greatest creative activity and of the fullest development of his 
powers. During this time he was engaged not only on the work for 
the Medici Gallery, but also on the imposing series of great religious 
pictures, such as “The Adoration of the Kings,” “Christ on the 
Cross (le Coup de Lance) ,” and the altar-piece for the altars of 
St. Francis Xavier and St. Ignatius Loyola, works which belong to 
the most sublime creations of the religious art of all times and 
which are at present the pride of the galleries in Antwerp and 
Vienna. Besides these greater works, however, he also painted 
a number of pictures which are more or less directly connected with 
his private life: portraits of his children, of his wife Isabella Brant, 
and of his nearest relations and friends. While he was only able 


to complete the extensive orders for the altar pictures with the help 
of assistants and pupils, he generally executed these pictures quite 
alone. 

The order for the altar-piece in the Cathedral of St. Bavo, 
Ghent, which Rubens had tried to obtain as early as 1612, belongs 
to these years of exuberant productivity. Bishop Maes of Ghent 
had first had the idea of this altar-piece; after his death, his two 
successors let the idea drop completely, and it was his third suc- 
cessor, Anton Triest, who took it up again and gave the important 
commission to Rubens, whom he greatly admired. The picture, 
“The Conversion of St. Bavo,” still adorns an altar in the Cathedral 
for which it was originally painted. 

Rubens, who was on friendly terms with so many of the leading 
personalities of his time, was also a close friend of the Archbishop. 
It is very likely that the artist, having received the Ghent order, 
painted this portrait as a special mark of his gratitude and devo- 
tion. It belongs therefore to those works painted entirely by Rubens 
himself, to those intensely personal expressions, which are as rare 
as they are highly prized, a fact which Dr. von Bode expressly em- 
phasizes in his expertisation. 

Looking at the head of the Archbishop we cannot help feeling 
what a significant personality he must have been. But the living 
and penetrating vision of his character reveals just as clearly the 
warm humanity of the painter, whose mastery is seen in every brush- 
stroke of the finely modeled face. The proud sweep of the lines of 
the robe, the grandeur of the composition as a whole recalls the 
portrait of another prince of the Church, painted some twenty-five 
years later, namely the portrait of Innocent X by Velasquez, in 
the Doria Gallery in Rome. The similarity between this picture and 
the earlier painting by Rubens, equally important of its kind, 
is astonishing, extending as it does not only to the conception as a 
whole, but even to details of attitude. 

Anton Triest was one of the leading prelates of his time, an im- 
portant and influential statesman and diplomat, who played a con- 
siderable part in the peace negotiations between the Hapsburgs and 


the Netherlands. He belonged to a highly respected family, and his 
brother was mayor of Ghent. A portrait of his brother by Van Dyck 
is extant; it was sold for 28,000 gns. in 1923 at the London auction 
of the collection of Lord Brownlow. 

Like many of the great statesmen of his day, Archbishop Triest 
was versatile in his interests and enjoyed a great reputation as patron 
of the arts. According to the inventory made at his death, his col- 
lection contained several of Rubens’ chief works, amongst others 
the Battle of the Amazons, The Garland of Fruit and the Slaughter 
of the Innocents, which Rubens painted specially for the Arch- 
bishop, works which are now the chief treasures of the Pinako- 
thek in Munich. By a fortunate chance it happened that in 1911 
our portrait of Anton Triest was exhibited in the Old Pinakothek 
with the other gems of the prelate’s collection. 


POPE INNOCENT X BY VELASQUEZ 


(See text for comparison between this portrait by 
Velasquez and Rubens’ portrait of the Archbishop 
A. Triest) 


“THe Hoty FAMILY” 


Ste HOEY FAMILY” 
by 
Peter Paut RuUBENsS 


(1577-1640) 


Oil on wood 
Height: 26 inches 
Width: 20 inches 


The Madonna is dressed in brilliant light red, and a filmy scarf 
is covering her wavy hair; a light blue cloak is thrown over her lap. 
St. Joseph wears a greyish-blue coat and a brown cloak, while 
Mother Anne’s grey dress is mostly covered by a yellowish-brown 
cloak. Her kerchief is white. An oriental rug in red, blue and 
white is thrown over the cradle. 


CERTIFICATED BY Dr. W. R. VALENTINER AS FOLLOWS: 


“The picture reproduced in this photograph is in my opinion an 
authentic and characteristic work of Rubens painted about 1602-5 and 
strongly influenced by the Raffael-School. It is an early work of the 
artist, but shows in the treatment of the Nude and in details 
like the hair of the children, the bird, the oriental rug the vigorous 
technique characteristic for the artist in his later development.” 


(Signed) W.R. VALENTINER. 
January 25, 1926. 


The Metropolitan Museum, New York, owns a small Rubens 
of “Two Apostles,” one of whom is identical with St. Joseph in 
our “Holy Family” (See reproduction in Oldenbourg’s “Rubens,” 
Klassiker der Kunst, p. 51). The Madonna herself is almost 
identical with Rubens’ famous “Virgin and Child in a Garland 


of Flowers” in the Munich Pinakothek (Reprod. p. 138). For gen- 
eral composition see also reproductions on pages 99, 285 and 340. 

In our colorful “Holy Family,” the central figure of which— 
Mary—is undoubtedly his own wife, Isabella Brant, Rubens shows 
himself as a great master in composition as well as in color. The 
whole lovely group is enclosed in a circle of easy flowing lines and 
within this circle the center of interest is located in a most fasci- 
nating ellipse, formed by the two playful little boys (perhaps 
Rubens’ own children) with their superbly modeled, health-breath- 
ing bodies, who contend for the frightened bird. In this way the 
eye of the spectator moves easily from detail to detail, enjoying 
each one, without losing the effect of the whole. 

The flesh, the hair, the bird’s feathers and all the various ma- 
terials, such as, for instance, the Persian rug, are as lifelike as 
can be. They actually breathe life. And the joyful colors weave 
a pattern of beauty over the whole painting. 

Besides all this, there is a very genuine and great human inter- 
est in the play of the two boys and in the sweet young mother and 
the older people who watch the play so interestedly and proudly. 
It is a family scene such as Rubens, this exemplary husband and 
father, loved to paint during his happy life with Isabella. 


Compare our “Holy Family” with this well-known 


painting of the same subject at the Pitti Palace in 
Florence 


MicHet OpnHoven, RusBEeNs’ FATHER-CONFESSOR 


“MICHEL OPHOVEN” 
by 


PETER PAUL RUBENS 


(1577-1640) 


Oil on canvas 
Height: 281% inches 
Width: 23% inches 


_ This portrait is, pictorially speaking, a most interesting and for 
Rubens rather rare study in black and white in which Rubens, the 
great colorist, proves that he as well as a Frans Hals and other great 
masters can get marvelous coloristic effects out of black and its 
contrasting white. There is just a touch of purple in the lining 
of the hood visible, which gives the desired emphasis and, of course, 
the well-known Rubens complexion of the face, which betrays the 
master in every stroke of the modeling brush, endows the portrait 
with pulsing life. Also the eyes, with their kindly, humorous twin- 
kle, add to the vividness with which the sitter has been portrayed. 
Thus, as in Rubens’ best portraits, in this one also the momentary 
and permanent aspect of the sitter has been caught to a very high 
degree. 

Rubens painted Ophoven, who was his father-confessor, once 
more in the same habit as a Dominican father around the year 1618. 
This portrait, a three-quarter length however, which now hangs in 
the Hague, is illustrated in “Klassiker der Kunst,” page 167, in 
Emile Michel’s “Rubens,” English edition vol. 2, page 38, and in 
Max Rooses’ monumental monograph on Rubens. 


From the Denain Collection 


Exhibited at the Anglo-Belgian Exhibition of Flemish Art at Bur- 
lington House, London, 1927 


INFANTA Maria ANNA, SISTER TO KinG Puiuip [V 


“INFANTA MARIA ANNA” 
by 
Peter PAaut RuBENS 
(1577-1640) 

Oil on canvas 

Height: 431%, inches 

Width: 321% inches 

Collection: Major McCalmont, Villa Medici, Fiesole 


This large state portrait of the Infanta Maria Anna in a Spanish 
Court costume must have been painted by Rubens during his stay 
in Madrid as ambassador extraordinary for the Archduchess Isa- 
bella, his patroness. At first, the King, brother to Maria Anna, 
did not look with favor at this “commoner” but soon began to 
appreciate him highly, even to like him personally as a man, a 
diplomat and an artist. Thus Rubens did many paintings for the 
Spanish Court, amongst them a number of portraits of the King, the 
Queen, and other members of the Royal family. 

Our portrait, in contrast to most of Rubens’ paintings, has a 
beautifully cool color scheme, in which the main elements are lovely 
shades of blue and silvery grey. They are, however, most effec- 
tively heightened almost into leaping flames by the many colored 
jewels which are most cleverly distributed over the entire garment. 
In that way this portrait is one of the most striking and interest- 
ing paintings by the master during his mature period. 

Donna Maria Anna was born in 1606 and married the son of 
Ferdinand II, Ferdinand III, King of Hungary, who, in 1637, 
became himself Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire in succession 
to his father. The royal couple led a very happy married life and 
had three sons. Maria Anna died in 1646 when she was only forty 
years of age. 

A well-known portrait of her by Velasquez, painted in 1630, 
hangs in the Prado Museum. 


Kinc Puiie IV oF SPAIN 


“PHILIP IV OF SPAIN” 
by 
PETER PAuL RUBENS 
(1577-1640) 
Oil on canvas 
Height: 1614 inches 
Width: 13 inches 


Accepted by Dr. Ludwig Burchard of Berlin, who is going to in- 
clude it in his forthcoming book on Rubens 


Philip IV, eldest son of Philip III and his Queen Margaret, was 
born at Valladolid in 1605 and died in 1665. He possessed more 
energy, both mental and physical, than his father, but he was unable 
to prevent the slow disintegration of his Kingdom, due in the main 
to internal causes beyond the control of the ablest ruler. His prime 
minister and favorite was the well-known Count Olivares. Philip IV 
was a fine horseman and keen hunter. His artistic taste was shown 
by his patronage of Velasquez, and his love of letters by his favor to 
Lope de Vega, Calderon and other dramatists. 

This portrait is a very intimate study of King Philip IV of 
Spain whom Velasquez has painted so often. It is quite uncom- 
promisingly done, showing the King’s rather unprepossessing and 
weak features, his somewhat sensuous mouth with the pronounced 
“Hapsburg lip,” but also his kindly eyes which look at us as if they 
wanted, against their own wish, to beg for sympathy and under- 
standing. Proud as this King is, the portrait seems to say, he is 
after all only a mortal and a weak one at that. But all that is 
stated so tactfully that it cannot have offended even the royal 
sitter himself. 

It is, however, highly interesting and instructive to compare our 
portrait with the well-known ones of this king by Velasquez, a 
comparison which shows at a glance the difference between these 
two great masters who knew and liked and thought highly of 
each other, but who were poles apart in their art, although both 
recognized nature as their great mother and inspirer. 


AX 


a 


~ te! ~# 
.- J ‘m _ F 
= . i . : wo 
a _ a » 
{ ~*% a , ie he bay 
i q . 4 y ‘ 
> + 
i ‘ 
t. : 
> =f bas 7 
- . ‘ 7 
# cE = “45> 
, ‘ “ a 
. a 
« “* 
. ‘ 
- t 
y # ree 
ra SF 
iw 
a“ ‘ = ‘ 
4 ~ 
ib = . wha ’ 
x é 
* 
. ’ 


r 


GETTY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 


WU MOI LV 


3125 0104 


ii 
/ 
f 


a 


bey: 
+ 


oA k 
oe 


